User talk:Bachinchi
Welcome Hi, welcome to Company of Heroes Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the 88mm Flak 36 page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Nukedz (Talk) 01:17, October 21, 2010 Greetings, I would like to thank you for cleaning up the unused categories in most of your edits. But it concerns me that the edits are mere changes in links and additions of spaces. Would it be possible that we can expand on this? Regards, Nukedz 15:27, October 21, 2010 (UTC) P.S. It occurs to me that you are using the old layout of this wiki. If in any case that you are using the old version, please go to the upper-right corner of the page, click preferences, and change the skin on the "skin tab" Hope that helps :) Nukedz 15:27, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Unit costs Do you know if the unit costs for units any different from singleplayer than for multiplayer? I recall the Sherman Crocodile costing 110 fuel in multiplayer. 13:29, October 21, 2010 (UTC) :Yes, there is some changes between single/multiplayer modes. And there is a LOT of changes between vCoH and COHO. Currently I dont have a list of those changes, gotta search forums... --Bachinchi 13:49, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Layout Greetings, I'm sorry but I'm afraid I cannot do that. The former admin, now a bureaucrat, Attack Rhino and I have agreed on this layout. I will not abide to change it. It is a part of the new wikis and we already made plans to improve on this new design. Please abide to this, as it has been agreed by the admins. :) Regards, Nukedz 16:11, October 21, 2010 (UTC) :Nukedz is correct, and Wikia Central is going to be enforcing this layout policy.† We will like your opinions on the current design and colour schemes, and how things could be changed for better, like the background colour and whatnot else. :We do not know exactly what Wikia plans in the next few months, especially about the New Look, where it will be going and how it will change, especially administration and design customisation. :Regards, :Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 15:05, October 22, 2010 (UTC) :†If you want more information on the New Look, go to our Main page, there are links there. ::It is not about the layout of the page, it is about the theme and colour design; that stuff… ::Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 08:47, October 24, 2010 (UTC) :::How do you think we should change the colour and theme design? I do not like the change I have made to the background colour, as it is harder for me to read things, especially the logs; like the . What do you think? :::Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 07:55, November 5, 2010 (UTC) ::::I like the new layout and design of the main page teplate. I also like very much what you have done with the background colour, great work. Maybe it is me, but I cannot see any difference between the wiki links. Generally good changes though, and I think that it would be a good idea to change the Featured Article and Media. ::::Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 00:55, November 7, 2010 (UTC) Re: Mistake Oh, don't worry about it. :) Thanks for letting me know, though. Xzar The Mad 17:01, October 21, 2010 (UTC) Categories Greetings, It has been to my concern that you are removing some categories on most of your edits. Mainly the Category:Company of Heroes and its expansions. Please refrain to this, as I have to rollback your deletions. Regards, Nukedz 16:56, October 22, 2010 (UTC) P.S. The Company of Heroes category and its expansions is used for missions and other articles that should not be categorized on others. Just add these categories as they also tell where they have been first introduced. For example, the Panzer IV was introduced in Company of Heroes; it will be categorized in "Category:Company of Heroes". Re: favicon Hi Bachinchi, I have protected the favicon you uploaded. The edit protection is currently at blocking new and unregistered users, and the move protection is at sysop level. I hope that is what you wanted. Reply to my talk page, or Nukedz's if you want it changed. By the way; the protection log… Regards, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 08:43, October 24, 2010 (UTC) Greetings, Unfortunately, I cannot change File:Wiki-wordmark-temp.png due to the fact that it blends to the background too much - most users will not see it clearly with the new layout. But, I considered the current wordmark to be changed eventually. Sincerely, Nukedz 08:57, November 2, 2010 (UTC) Re: RfA (Request for Adminship) Hi Bachinchi, I cannot completely agree that Nukedz has not been active recently (by looking at his . Sure, he sometimes has not edited anything for a couple of days at a time, but if you look through , I have sometimes not been on for a few days. I therefore think the activity of the administration of this wiki is a relative moot point in this discussion. I can although understand where you are coming from for the rest of your RfA. There are only two things that I think would be stopping you from an admin here. 1) the Fact that we already have an admin, and Ｉdo not believe that another will significantly help, or more precisely the fact that the wiki is in need of another admin currently. 2) I also cannot think of how sysop powers will greatly enhance you ability to help this wiki. The two arguments above might give reasons for you not being given sysop powers, I also do not believe they are very good reasons for you not to be given sysop powers. They only thing I want you to do is 1) convince me with more detailed reasons and 2)some past evidence from elsewhere, other wikis or generally of websites of whatever else you see fit will also be good. I will also be asking some advice from Sarah Manley (Wikia staff), who I have spoken to before. Kind regards, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 09:55, November 4, 2010 (UTC) P.S. I just reread your post on my talk page, and I did notice that you said of your familiarity of Media-Wiki, CSS and Javascript. How are you with HTML/XML? ...as Ｉdo know that would also be an added asset. Massive change to CoH:OF Hey Bachinchi, I noticed the huge change you made the Opposing Fronts page. GREAT STUFF you added there, great stuff! I do have one small bone to pick though: does the page need to be that long, and also there are a few internal links that are already in use, but they are not, like the Commandos, which you are labelling as something else. Anyway, thanks for the edit, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 10:12, November 4, 2010 (UTC) :When I wrote the above, I did feel I was point out the obvious to you. I did although think that if there was a chance you did not know, or did not notice how the page was at that time, I thought it would be good to know. It is also good you agree about the lenght of the page, and know about the incorrect links. :Regards, :Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 01:18, November 5, 2010 (UTC) :P.S. nice info box and temp! ::I saw your recent edits and trimmings on the page, nice! ::Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 02:35, November 5, 2010 (UTC) ::P.S. To heck with it, you are now an admin! Main Page layout, design and content For the Featured Article''s section, you said in the Wiki talk page that the FAs can be randomly generated to be displayed on the main page with the FA template. How does one go about doing that? Also, what type of script did you write with to make the main page template? Thanks, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 09:16, November 7, 2010 (UTC) :Ah yes, I saw the HTML. I thought it was, although I was not completely sure. By what you mean with the sub-templates you mean that they are also HTML/XML? If that, then I have enough confidence to do minimal editing of them.* I should then be able to help you with the othe FA options (or whatever) Would you be able to clarify how frequent the random displaying of the FAs and FMs are? :Thanks, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 09:47, November 7, 2010 (UTC) :I have learnt just enough HTML to do very basic text changes and whatnot else. ::I can help you with the editing of the FA articles and whatnot else, I just currently do not have enough time to be able to put together a whole new article from scratch. That Flak 88 article took something like an hour to do properly (as you see it), and I do not have that leisure at the moment. As said above, I can make observations, comments, edits and changes to these articles, like the FA section, but I cannot wholly create any pages or articles myself. I would be very happy to help you or anyone else with editing anything here though. ::Kind regards, ::Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 03:21, November 8, 2010 (UTC) Policies Greetings, Although that's the first time I've seen the policies page (because I barely read policies for that matter), it's a good addition to the wiki, just in case someone wants to read the wikia policies. Regards, Nukedz 23:40, November 8, 2010 (UTC) Hey Bachinchi, I read the new policies that you have added. Two policies I think we will need to edit/tailor to our wiki are the Manual of Style and User treatment policies. I thinkt it is rather clear that the User treatment policy needs to be significantly changed to fit our wiki. I am not sure if the Manual of Style is currently written along the lines of what our wiki si currently looking like. What do you think? Regards, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 03:47, November 11, 2010 (UTC) CfD of "What do we want in CoH 2?" Hey Bachinchi, I have posted a new topic on the CfD talk page. I don't really understand your reasoning for the CfD of this page Regards, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 01:33, November 18, 2010 (UTC) P.S. If you did not know, please direct discussion to the CfD talk page, thanks. Thanks for the changes and fixes but... Hey Bachinchi, I have seen all of the you have made. Thanks for them, especially the media-wiki ones and I like the merging of the Medic, as it makes a lot of sense. I saw you also made some templates, and protected the policies. I do not really understand why you made a template for citations though, (and the doc). If there was any real reason for it to be made, would it not be better suited to a Wiki Citation page? Kind Regards, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 05:46, November 25, 2010 (UTC) :Why not? I thought a projet page would have made more sense. Then again, you are more senoir than me in knowledge and experience with Wikipedia. :Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 01:29, November 26, 2010 (UTC) interesting blog and suggestions (of improvement drive) Hi Bachinchi, I saw this blog by a newly registered member on the wiki. I think you might want to read it. I would like to hear your thoughts. G1n032, the user's blog and his talk page. Reagrds, Attack Rhino (Talk - ) 14:05, March 24, 2011 (UTC) Template work Hi, since you obviously know what you're doing with all the templates and documentation and stuff, could you take a look at Template:Cover? I wrote it with lots of nested ifs, since that's about what all my programming looks like... Could use a tune-up by someone who actually understands all the parsing functions. Also, as you probably saw I played with the infobox templates quite a bit to make them work as they do now (including changes to Template:Infobox to accept individual header styles). That might need cleaning up too (or preferable, some CSS Classes instead, I can't edit those). Oh and, I'm using FireFox and don't know what the gradients I used look like on Chrome or Opera or all those other browsers, I have no way to check whether they look the same as they do in FireFox. Do you have a good way to check that? Thanks. -- Headrock 17:04, July 19, 2011 (UTC) P.S. Because you're the only active admin, just to let you know what I've been doing in the past month: I've completely revamped '''ALL' of the British pages, including units, command tree options, the lot. All of those articles were completely re-written - I left almost nothing that was there in the first place, it was a huge mess. I am currently re-doing all the Panzer Elite articles, going by tech tree progression. I'm about 1/3 done with the Panzer Elite at this point. It should take another two weeks or so to complete that, and next if I have the energy I'll continue to the Americans or Wehrmacht. :Just to let you know, when I do end up finishing whatever's on the table, I will eventually re-check your work on the Wehrmacht articles and might re-do them entirely like I did to everything I worked on so far.... It's really nothing personal or arrogance or anything, I just have impossibly-high standards (read: "mild insanity"). ;) Then again I only had to change the British and Panzer Elite articles so thoroughly because the original ones sucked balls. :Also, I'm not interested in admin rights (surely you mean Bureau rights), the only use I'd have for those is CSS, I wouldn't do well managing this place anyway. Thank you for the offer. :Finally, with regards to the gradients, as you saw I put many of those into the various infobox templates (as I said, I redid the infantry/vehicle/building templates quite extensively), but I think I messed up the gradient directions in the webkit/normal ones. Just saying - I bet it isn't that important. ::There is something you can do that doesn't require good English but is really important: replacing all those terrible screenshots from User:Willy NOD. Some of them are fine, but many are baaaaaad. I don't know how he could possibly take such bad screenshots (looks like his screen settings were really low, and badly configured), but there are LOTS of them and they're really terrible. His one strong point was to get good "scenarios", like getting a good camera angle to make a cool picture - which would be great if they didn't look so bad. I was thinking of "redoing" some of his work by carefully positioning units the same way as they appear in the images, but that's a lot of work and I'm busy writing all this content. :D :: Anyhow, if you have the skill for that, you might be able to do a lot of good by creating new screenshots for the Gallery sections (I'm creating the "primary" screenshots for each unit, that's easy enough, they don't have to be interesting, just clear). A lot of articles could benefit from good screenshots. Especially missing are units with different upgrades, units firing their weapons, using abilities and interesting combat situations. :: Also, I've been putting most of the images in the Gallery section of each article rather than inside the article itself. I think in some situations it's good to put them in the article, though sometimes they just squash the text and make it difficult to read. Your opinion on this would be very very helpful... :::To answer your question, I read the game data files with a very useful tool called "Corsix's Mod Studio". It displays all the unit attributes, modifiers from effects, objects appearing in game, weapons, explosions, pretty much everything you need to get a good picture of how the game works "behind the scenes". There's a lot of comparing one thing to other things (like comparing two weapons or two units, the differences are sometimes really small...). If there's something I'm not sure about, I run a game with the CheatMod activated, and test it out to see how the data and the rules actually behave in the game. :::Both these tools are absolutely excellent, and very recommended. :::And if you want to take cool screenshots, that CheatMod is amazingly useful too. You can build very complex "artificial" combat situations with it... Greating fuckin' tool. --Headrock 23:04, July 19, 2011 (UTC) Collapsible Infobox Data When I saw the Collapsible List template you added yesterday I began having some ideas that might reduce the size of the infoboxes. I figure the "Produces"/"Abilities"/etc. boxes don't need to display all their data if the reader doesn't ask for it. The easiest way to do so is to make the boxes or the data collapsible. The best way I can see this done is if each of the colored header bars (for instances the green "Production" box) shows the number of items on that list and a "SHOW" button. When the "SHOW" button is clicked, the box containing all the details is opened, just like with the collapsible list template. The problem is that if I use the template you've added, then it's the green box that expands, and all the text appears in that green box (since it's now part of the header). What I'm suggesting is that the SHOW button actually displays the Data box in the same way that it appears now. Here's a screenshot of how that's supposed to work: Collapsed (initial) state on the left, expanded state on the right. I don't know if that's possible, might require custom-made javascript and/or a serious alteration to the Infobox template, but it'll be extremely useful for keeping the infoboxes a little smaller, since on pages like the Panzer Grenadiers they take up a LOT of room. I did manage to do something similar with the info itself. Instead of collapsing the entire box for each segment, I collapsed the bullets in the segment. So instead of using this: |produces = Infantry Section * A versatile defensive anti-infantry squad. * Costs , * 37 seconds to produce I used this: |produces = , | 3 = 37 seconds to produce }} This conserves some space (not a lot) and keeps the button images visible, but it feels weird to use this because you have to expand each item you want to look at. Let me know if you have any ideas. -- Headrock 16:13, July 20, 2011 (UTC) :I think I have solved it. Check this. :D I didn't use but the solution was not clean, I had to create a table inside the infobox. --Bachinchi 17:17, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::Yeah, that's lovely! So do I just need to change the templates used in each page? Also I'd like to add the number of list items to the header title, as shown in the image above. I hope I don't run into any trouble. --Headrock 17:56, July 20, 2011 (UTC) :::I've changed the infoboxes. Everythin seems to work just fine. And Panzer Grenadiers now looks great! --Bachinchi 19:56, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::::Several things: ::::# Since you seem to be busy, I'm going to try adding numbers to the collapsible section headers. I also think the show text should be a tad smaller - I hope I can figure out how the change its size, would that be simpler with wikia.css, or should I just edit the collapsible infobox template? ::::# Something is wrong with the veterancy tables for Panzer Elites. Now that the PEB template is in use, it looks like these tables don't expand properly - at least for me they don't. Instead of opening a box with the entire table in it, the full-sized table is displayed at the bottom of the page. Any idea if your changes have caused this? ::::# About categorization, are you use removing the CoH:OF category is wise? Shouldn't there be a category that contains all pages relevant to the expansion? ::::# Also, what about the template? It could use some cool gradients/effects, I just can't think of any right now ;) --Headrock 21:02, July 20, 2011 (UTC) # I was busy... playing! show is now smaller. # :O WTH. I'll take a look into it! # There shouldn't be many articles in top level articles, IMO. It's better to use subcategorization. # CommandTree Template is great! For the moment I'll add the same effects currently in use with the PanzerElite Bonus tables. --Bachinchi 21:16, July 20, 2011 (UTC) :Have a look at Infantry Section. Do the numbers on the labels look ok, or are they unnecessary? Or maybe should be formatted differently? I made the edits directly to the specific infobox templates, was easy enough. :The smaller "show" looks great, that's excellent. --Headrock 21:20, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::Just as expected. Cool! --Bachinchi 21:23, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::The expand problem: It does not work in Call of Duty Wiki. Not Firefox 4, Chromium (nightly), or Internet Explorer 9. It seems something went wrong with today update. --Bachinchi 01:24, July 21, 2011 (UTC)